ADF warns of "climate conflict" (maybe...)

The Sydney Morning Herald is in full scaremongering swing this morning with a front page article forecasting more conflicts as a result of "climate change" (surely "global warming"... Ed), and quoting that ever reliable source of balanced comment, James Hansen. Here's a handy summary of the weasel words in the article:

• "May": 4
• "Could": 3
• "Risk": 3

and here's the scary spin from the Herald:

RISING sea levels could lead to failed states across the Pacific and require extra naval deployments to deal with increases in illegal migration and fishing, a Defence Force analysis says.

"Environmental stress" has increased the risk of conflicts over resources and food and may demand greater involvement by the military in stabilisation, reconstruction and disaster relief, the analysis, prepared by Defence's strategic policy division, says.

It warns there is a risk of a serious global conflict over the Arctic as melting icecaps allow easier access to undersea oil and gas deposits.

Those would be the melting ice caps that have exactly the same extent of ice they had back in 1979, right? But when you actually read the report it's even more vague:

"From a defence planning perspective, we don't know how quickly these changes will occur, exactly what their impact will be, or how states and societies will react"

i.e., we know precisely Jack shit, but we'll make lots of scary predictions anyway. Then the Herald wheels out Hansen:

Dr Hanson, head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said Australia was making "honest efforts" to tackle climate change but failing.

Carbon trading schemes such as that proposed by the Federal Government would slow the rate of greenhouse emissions too slowly, Dr Hanson said.

"This approach is ineffectual and not commensurate with the climate threat," he said. "It could waste another decade, locking in disastrous consequences for our planet and humanity."

Read it here.